On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 11:50:10AM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 26.03.2010, at 11:40, Bruce Majia wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 10:10:19AM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: > >> > >> On 26.03.2010, at 08:15, Bruce Majia wrote: > >> > >>> On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 03:06:11PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > >>>> On 01/10/2010 07:01 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > >>>>> While trying to compile an E500 vmlinux, I stumbled across a compilation bug > >>>>> that was obviously there before I touched any of the code. A trace point > >>>>> doesn't get the correct arguments. > >>>>> > >>>>> Since that shouldn't be any critical to the functionality of the code, my quick > >>>>> workaround is to #if 0 it out. I would very much appreciate someone fixing it > >>>>> properly though. > >>>>> > >>>>> Liu, it would be nice if you could be the one doing that. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Applied, thanks. > >>> > >>> Hi Avi, > >>> > >>> Seems the problem still exists in the mainline kernel. Are you guys miss > >>> something in the past few months? Does it means even if I passed compile > >>> phase with the '#if 0' workaround, it's functions are not completed yet. > >>> So its impossible to try kvm on ppc e500 target? > >> > >> If #if 0 only affects you if you want to trace that specific function. It's probably safe to say you don't care, so just #if 0 it out and be good :-). > >> > >> Alex > > > > I'd like to say I am okay with #if 0 stuff. :) But fail to have the > > source code compiled is bad. Based on latest linus tree, I have to > > apply following stuff to make KVM + mpc85xx_defconfig pass build phase: > > > > --- > > arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c | 2 +- > > arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c | 2 ++ > > arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c | 2 +- > > 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c > > index 4d686cc..0cde83b 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c > > @@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ static int kvmppc_booke_irqprio_deliver(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > > unsigned int priority) > > { > > int allowed = 0; > > - ulong msr_mask; > > + ulong msr_mask = 0; > > This is a real bug. > > > bool update_esr = false, update_dear = false; > > > > switch (priority) { > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c > > index 0d772e6..c52e8c2 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c > > @@ -225,8 +225,10 @@ static void kvmppc_e500_stlbe_invalidate(struct kvmppc_vcpu_e500 *vcpu_e500, > > > > kvmppc_e500_shadow_release(vcpu_e500, tlbsel, esel); > > stlbe->mas1 = 0; > > +#if 0 > > trace_kvm_stlb_inval(index_of(tlbsel, esel), stlbe->mas1, stlbe->mas2, > > stlbe->mas3, stlbe->mas7); > > +#endif > > > Avi, please make sure e43f2f741a49483034bf968841275cfa553a4cb3 gets into 2.6.34. Yeah, thanks very much. I got it: $ git branch -a --contains=e43f2f741a49483034bf968841275cfa553a4cb3 remotes/kvm/master remotes/kvm/msr-trace remotes/kvm/next > > > } > > > > static void kvmppc_e500_tlb1_invalidate(struct kvmppc_vcpu_e500 *vcpu_e500, > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c > > index 51aedd7..372b678 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c > > @@ -277,7 +277,7 @@ static void kvmppc_complete_dcr_load(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > > static void kvmppc_complete_mmio_load(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > > struct kvm_run *run) > > { > > - ulong gpr; > > + ulong gpr = 0; > > This is a bug, but should never hit anyone. Either way having warnings is bad. > > > Bruce, please put the two not initialized variables in a patch, put a proper Signed-off-by with patch description in and submit it to kvm-ppc@vger and kvm@vger. I'll ack it then, but would like to keep the credits to you :) Got it, Will send it soon. -bm > > > Alex -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html